^ Important.
Not important:
[quote name='ramana' date='06 March 2010 - 01:40 AM' timestamp='1267819370' post='104879']I will be pilloried for saying this but accepting Qatari or some other fundoo citizienship was what I thought MFH would do. [color="#0000FF"]I was always under the impression that his attack on Hindu icons was due to his inherent Islamism and not any radical modernism.[/color] The evidence is he alwasy clothed Muslim and Chritian icons in chaste clothing while depicting Hindu incons in a negative manner. In this very thread we have examples of how he treats themes from various religions.
[/quote]But, but, but you *have* changed your position: you earlier stated that MFH was a communist with islamic appearance employing modernism to pull down Hindu society, now you know he is islamic (as in, motivated by islamism).
Here, on the first page of this same thread, you posted:
[quote name='ramana' date='26 May 2007 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1180189540' post='69359']
[...]
So using the prestige he has acquired he uses it to attack the major religion and culture of the land. Art is his weapon while the others on the Left are still stuck in text. MFH is bent on attacking the image of Indian society.
He is not doing it from a Islamic point of view. So to counter him as an Islamist is not going to get you anywhere for he is not. He is a watermelon- green on the outside but red inside. My own textual contribution to imagery.
The difficulty of countering MFH is people dont know what he is talking about unless you go through the education about Modernism. Its amazing that in the 1930-40s there were a group of Indians who were as modern as the best of them in the West.
[...]
[/quote]
Please don't frown. It's my character: I'm trivially pedantic by nature. I have the memory of an elephant in some/irrelevant things - and that of a goldfish in all others - and can't leave well alone. (But of course, it's a very selective memory because I always conveniently 'forget'/overlook anything *I* said earlier - and will declare pompously to people too polite to correct me that "I always said so" to somehow prove I was right since the Beginning Of Time. E.g. my who-asked-me-anyway "Didn't I always say christoislamania was evil?" lecture series. When in reality I only learnt the truth about christoislamism since a number of years ago now.)
[size="1"]Bite-back clause: The above admission may never be used against me. Not in court, not in argument, not in jest.[/size]
Never mind, Ramana. I will train you to be as expert as I am in making impossible statements. The first thing you need to lose is your total innocence in erring: you must commit them blatantly and willfully. Next, you should quit making rare, minor, insignificant inconsistencies and focus on frequent, impossibly large and fundamental errors like I do. "The world is flat. Don't argue with me" type thing.
With constant practice over the entire rest of your life, you may perhaps one day reach a level, still comparing very infavourably with mine, but much improved from .... No, it's no good. I'm misleading you. You'll never get there: it's a gift only I possess.
So. Didn't I *always* say christoislamania was evil?
Not important:
[quote name='ramana' date='06 March 2010 - 01:40 AM' timestamp='1267819370' post='104879']I will be pilloried for saying this but accepting Qatari or some other fundoo citizienship was what I thought MFH would do. [color="#0000FF"]I was always under the impression that his attack on Hindu icons was due to his inherent Islamism and not any radical modernism.[/color] The evidence is he alwasy clothed Muslim and Chritian icons in chaste clothing while depicting Hindu incons in a negative manner. In this very thread we have examples of how he treats themes from various religions.
[/quote]But, but, but you *have* changed your position: you earlier stated that MFH was a communist with islamic appearance employing modernism to pull down Hindu society, now you know he is islamic (as in, motivated by islamism).
Here, on the first page of this same thread, you posted:
[quote name='ramana' date='26 May 2007 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1180189540' post='69359']
[...]
So using the prestige he has acquired he uses it to attack the major religion and culture of the land. Art is his weapon while the others on the Left are still stuck in text. MFH is bent on attacking the image of Indian society.
He is not doing it from a Islamic point of view. So to counter him as an Islamist is not going to get you anywhere for he is not. He is a watermelon- green on the outside but red inside. My own textual contribution to imagery.
The difficulty of countering MFH is people dont know what he is talking about unless you go through the education about Modernism. Its amazing that in the 1930-40s there were a group of Indians who were as modern as the best of them in the West.
[...]
[/quote]
Please don't frown. It's my character: I'm trivially pedantic by nature. I have the memory of an elephant in some/irrelevant things - and that of a goldfish in all others - and can't leave well alone. (But of course, it's a very selective memory because I always conveniently 'forget'/overlook anything *I* said earlier - and will declare pompously to people too polite to correct me that "I always said so" to somehow prove I was right since the Beginning Of Time. E.g. my who-asked-me-anyway "Didn't I always say christoislamania was evil?" lecture series. When in reality I only learnt the truth about christoislamism since a number of years ago now.)
[size="1"]Bite-back clause: The above admission may never be used against me. Not in court, not in argument, not in jest.[/size]
Never mind, Ramana. I will train you to be as expert as I am in making impossible statements. The first thing you need to lose is your total innocence in erring: you must commit them blatantly and willfully. Next, you should quit making rare, minor, insignificant inconsistencies and focus on frequent, impossibly large and fundamental errors like I do. "The world is flat. Don't argue with me" type thing.
With constant practice over the entire rest of your life, you may perhaps one day reach a level, still comparing very infavourably with mine, but much improved from .... No, it's no good. I'm misleading you. You'll never get there: it's a gift only I possess.
So. Didn't I *always* say christoislamania was evil?